Tag Archives: Torah

Deuteronomy 27-Preserving the Law

Moses by Victorvictori, permission granted by author through WikiCommons

Deuteronomy 27: 1-8 An Enduring Word

¹ Then Moses and the elders of Israel charged all the people as follows: Keep the entire commandment that I am commanding you today. ² On the day that you cross over the Jordan into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall set up large stones and cover them with plaster. ³ You shall write on them all the words of this law when you have crossed over, to enter the land that the LORD your God is giving you, a land flowing with milk and honey, as the LORD, the God of your ancestors, promised you. ⁴ So when you have crossed over the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, about which I am commanding you today, on Mount Ebal, and you shall cover them with plaster.

⁵ And you shall build an altar there to the LORD your God, an altar of stones on which you have not used an iron tool. ⁶ You must build the altar of the LORD your God of unhewn stones. Then offer up burnt offerings on it to the LORD your God, ⁷ make sacrifices of well-being, and eat them there, rejoicing before the LORD your God. ⁸ You shall write on the stones all the words of this law very clearly.

Deuteronomy narrates a scene where Moses has dictated the law to the people in its completion prior to their entering into the promised land. We know that Moses is not going to cross over with the people and so in the remaining chapters we see the beginning of a massive transition in the leadership of the people. We live in a time where written texts are readily available and even if we don’t have a physical copy for many texts a digital copy is only a few keystrokes away. In the ancient world there are very few physical texts and a relatively small class who are able to read and create the written texts. Even something as central as the law was lost, intentionally or unintentionally, multiple times in the story of the people of Israel and Judah. For example, in the reign of King Josiah it is reported in 2 Kings 22: 8: “The high priest Hilkiah said to Shaphan the secretary, “I have found the book of the law in the house of the LORD.” When Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, he read it. Shortly afterwards the written text is read before the king and the king continues the work of reform.

Moses has been the mediator of the law between the LORD and the people, but with Moses about to leave his role as leader, judge, mediator and teacher there needs to be a way for the people to refer to this critical law he is leaving behind. Oral texts may survive a couple of generations intact, but ultimately for the law to survive it must become a textual document. Much like the recording of the words of the prophet Jeremiah in Jeremiah 36, where the prophet’s haunting and inconvenient words survive both the physical threat to the prophet as well as the burning by King Jehoiakim by being recorded again, now the critical exposition of the law in Deuteronomy 4-26 is to be put on plastered stones to be a visible witness to the people. This “furniture of the covenant” (Brueggemann, 2001 , p. 251) now is to be a manner in which future leaders can refer back to the law that Moses handed on. Moses now begins to step aside from being the teacher of the law to make space for the written law that future leaders and the people will be governed by.

Moses throughout his ministry has occupied a central role in the place between the people and God. Even with the elders and the tribal leaders and priest, ultimately he is the one who mediated the relationship between the people and their God, was the political leader, their chief judge and prophet, their lawgiver, and peacemaker. Yet, as Rabbi Kushner can state,

In the Jewish tradition, we speak of him as Moses Rabeinu—Moses, Our Teacher—not Moses, our Political Leader; not Moses, Who Freed the Slaves. Moses, Our Teacher. He dedicates himself to getting the people to embrace the ideas that they have to live by when he’s no longer around to remind them. (Thompson, 2014, p. 194)

Moses, throughout Deuteronomy has been working to equip the people to live in accordance with the commandments, statutes and ordinances outlined within the book. He has done this with catechetical practices within the home and with worship practices at the place where the LORD’s name will rest that reinforce their identity as the people of God. Here in the recording of the law and the building of an altar to celebrate and worship the LORD the narrative shows Moses preparing the people for a faithful practice of the covenant when he is no longer there to guide or intercede for them. And when the people fail to live out the covenant, then the stones themselves can testify very clearly against them.

Deuteronomy 27: 9-10 Hear One More Time

⁹ Then Moses and the levitical priests spoke to all Israel, saying: Keep silence and hear, O Israel! This very day you have become the people of the LORD your God. ¹⁰ Therefore obey the LORD your God, observing his commandments and his statutes that I am commanding you today.

Moses, along with the priest, charges the people one final time with their identity and calling. Echoing the tone of the Shema in Deuteronomy 6: 4-5 he makes a final appeal for the people to hear. In an aural world they are to be silent and listen so they may remember who they are. They are the people of the LORD their God and therefore they are to be obedient. Their calling comes with blessing and challenges, and in their faithfulness they will be a witness to the nations and a blessing to the world. In their failing they will become the embodiment of the curses that will come in the following chapter.

Herny Fenn, Ruins on the Summit of Mount Gerazim, On the Site of the Samaritan Temple (between 1881 and 1884)

Deuteronomy 27: 11-26 A Liturgy of Curses

¹¹ The same day Moses charged the people as follows: ¹² When you have crossed over the Jordan, these shall stand on Mount Gerizim for the blessing of the people: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin. ¹³ And these shall stand on Mount Ebal for the curse: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali. ¹⁴ Then the Levites shall declare in a loud voice to all the Israelites:
¹⁵ “Cursed be anyone who makes an idol or casts an image, anything abhorrent to the LORD, the work of an artisan, and sets it up in secret.” All the people shall respond, saying, “Amen!”
¹⁶ “Cursed be anyone who dishonors father or mother.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
¹⁷ “Cursed be anyone who moves a neighbor’s boundary marker.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
¹⁸ “Cursed be anyone who misleads a blind person on the road.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
¹⁹ “Cursed be anyone who deprives the alien, the orphan, and the widow of justice.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²⁰ “Cursed be anyone who lies with his father’s wife, because he has violated his father’s rights.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²¹ “Cursed be anyone who lies with any animal.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²² “Cursed be anyone who lies with his sister, whether the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²³ “Cursed be anyone who lies with his mother-in-law.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²⁴ “Cursed be anyone who strikes down a neighbor in secret.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²⁵ “Cursed be anyone who takes a bribe to shed innocent blood.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”
²⁶ “Cursed be anyone who does not uphold the words of this law by observing them.” All the people shall say, “Amen!”

The chapter ends with a series of twelve individual curses that the community is to place on anyone who violates particular actions. This sets the scene as well for the blessings and curses in chapter 28 where six tribes are on Mount Ebal for curses and six tribes are on Mount Gerazim for blessings. The two mountains are on the opposite sides of a valley and for the Samaritans Mount Gerazim would become one of their holy sites. Within Deuteronomy Mount Gerazim becomes the mountain of blessing while Mount Ebal is the mountain of curse, yet for Deuteronomy the tablets of the law and the altar are to be built on Mount Ebal rather than Mount Gerazim.

Many of these are covered earlier in Deuteronomy and rather than spend much time on those I will link you back to the discussion at the appropriate place in Deuteronomy, but a few are new. Verse 15 which concerns idols and images is talked about earlier in Deuteronomy 4: 15-20, and Deuteronomy 5:8-10 and is depending on how you number either part of the first commandment or the second commandment. Verse 16 also harkens back to the ten commandments with the commandment on honoring father and mother in Deuteronomy 5: 16 and is also expanded in Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 with the punishment for children who are rebellious and bring dishonor to their father and mother. Verse 17 concerns the moving of boundary markers which is addressed in Deuteronomy 19: 14. Verse 18 is the first new item on misleading the blind, but it follows in the concern that people care for the vulnerable and the weak in the society. Leviticus 19: 14 also addresses this when it states, “You shall not revile the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind; you shall fear the LORD your God.” Caring for the vulnerable is a central part of living out of the covenant and one of the places where the prophets are called upon to point out the way the people have not cared for the vulnerable. The next curse continues about those who oppress the representative triumvirate of the vulnerable, the widows, the orphan and the alien. The tithe, addressed in Deuteronomy 14: 29 and Deuteronomy 26: 12-13, the inclusion of the vulnerable in the festivals like outlined in Deuteronomy 16: 11, 14 the practice of allowing the remnant of the harvest and vine to be gleaned by the vulnerable in Deuteronomy 24: 19-22 are all concrete practices to help care for the vulnerable in their community. Verse 20 about lying with the father’s wife is covered in Deuteronomy 22: 30. The next three curses about forbidden sexual relations are new to Deuteronomy but fit within the ordered world of Deuteronomy 22:13-26 for the author of Deuteronomy’s view of sexual relations. Sexual relations with any animal, with a sister or a mother-in-law are forbidden and Deuteronomy doesn’t feel the need to explain these any further. The command in verse 24 about striking a neighbor in secret is new and it addresses disputes outside the purview of the community. For Deuteronomy the community and the elders are key to ensuring that disputes are resolved equitably. The curse about taking a bribe to shed innocent blood is addressed in the judicial context of Deuteronomy 16:19. Finally the last curse is general in nature referring to the entirety of the law and the need for obedience. This final curse may round it out to bring the final number of these individual curses to the representative twelve. Obedience is both an individual and communal responsibility, where the community holds the individual accountable. By placing these curses in the mouths of the people as they enter the land their own words hold them accountable to living in obedience to this law and covenant.

Deuteronomy 21: Death, Rebellious Children, Captured Women and Inheritance

12 Replies

The First Funeral, Louis Ernest Barrias (1883)

Deuteronomy 21: 1-9: Dealing with an Unsolvable Death

¹ If, in the land that the LORD your God is giving you to possess, a body is found lying in open country, and it is not known who struck the person down, ² then your elders and your judges shall come out to measure the distances to the towns that are near the body. ³ The elders of the town nearest the body shall take a heifer that has never been worked, one that has not pulled in the yoke; ⁴ the elders of that town shall bring the heifer down to a wadi with running water, which is neither plowed nor sown, and shall break the heifer’s neck there in the wadi. ⁵ Then the priests, the sons of Levi, shall come forward, for the LORD your God has chosen them to minister to him and to pronounce blessings in the name of the LORD, and by their decision all cases of dispute and assault shall be settled. ⁶ All the elders of that town nearest the body shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the wadi, ⁷ and they shall declare: “Our hands did not shed this blood, nor were we witnesses to it. ⁸ Absolve, O LORD, your people Israel, whom you redeemed; do not let the guilt of innocent blood remain in the midst of your people Israel.” Then they will be absolved of bloodguilt. ⁹ So you shall purge the guilt of innocent blood from your midst, because you must do what is right in the sight of the LORD.

The author of Deuteronomy is concerned that the people’s life in the land is not contaminated by bloodguilt and that they have a means for dealing with an unsolvable death in their land. Even though the death may not be solvable there still needs to be action on behalf of the community to atone for the wrong that has been done and to make things right. This issue also comes up in Deuteronomy 19: 1-13 when discussing the cities of refuge to ensure innocent blood is not spilled for an accidental killing. In Deuteronomy’s perspective there is a need to atone for the death that occurs and only blood can do that. The ritual involves the elders of the community and the Levites who come together to absolve the community of guilt.

The ritual itself involves assigning the responsibility to the nearest town, the giving up of something of high value to the community, declaration of innocence of the community, blessing and finally a ritual of surrendering responsibility. The role of the Levites in the judicial process laid out in Deuteronomy 17: 8-13 is now expanded here to involve any case of dispute and assault, but they also oversee the actions of the community to make things right with God. Once the responsibility is assigned to the elders of the town they bring a heifer, a cow that has not been used for agricultural purposes and has not born a calf, and identify a wadi, a ravine which must have running water, that is also not being used in agricultural purposes to conduct the ritual. Breaking the heifer’s neck kills the animal in a non-sacrificial way and unlike the sacrifices (talked about earlier in Deuteronomy 12, in relation to the festivals in Deuteronomy 16, and in relation to the priests in Deuteronomy 18) there is no mention of participating in eating the heifer that has been killed. This animal is lost to the community in the action of absolution. The washing of hands to absolve responsibility is a common practice, but here the elders of the community act on behalf of the community: declaring innocence both in action and in not covering up the crime and attempt to make things right between the community and God.

Deuteronomy is an ancient book and it is sometimes difficult to approach in our world, and one of the reasons I spend the time working through this publicly is there is not much that is available online that is not either using Deuteronomy as a classic case of how irrelevant the Bible and religion is or on the other side lifts up Deuteronomy (often individual verses or sections) as a methodology that we should embrace without reflection in all its harshness. Most Christian pastors, especially in the more liturgical traditions, spend very little time in Deuteronomy other than perhaps chapters 4-6. Yet, as I have moved through these sections of Deuteronomy that deal with interpreting the law for the people of Israel it has become for me a dialogue within and between scripture. Wanting to honor and find what wisdom Deuteronomy has and how its perspective on God’s relationship to God’s people might help our communal life as Christians even when we can’t always agree with either the rules or the perspectives contained within Deuteronomy.

Some passages, including some coming immediately after this one, we would not want to integrate into our life in our society, but in our litigious society there is no way to deal with an unsolved case. It simply remains unsolved unless, somewhere down the road, a new revelation makes the case solvable. In events where a public wrong has been done, like an unsolved murder, perhaps there would be wisdom in finding a way for community leaders and religious leaders to come together, to denounce the wrong that has been done, to ensure that they do not bear responsibility for the actions and to atone on behalf of the community. Perhaps these actions might begin the process of the community’s healing and bring together the community to protect and watch over the fellow members of the community so that this type of action does not occur in the future.

Deuteronomy 21: 10-14 The Female Captive

¹⁰ When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God hands them over to you and you take them captive, ¹¹ suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire and want to marry, ¹² and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shave her head, pare her nails, ¹³ discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain in your house a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. ¹⁴ But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.

War in any time is hellish both for the soldiers involved in it but perhaps even more so for those who are the victims of the conflict. Women and children rarely had any choices when their cities or lands were captured. From a modern standard the idea of forcing a captive woman to marry a warrior of the army that has conquered their land seems abhorrent. Deanna Thompson argues that this passage is a “glimpse of restraint in the midst of the brutal realities of war.” (Thompson, 2014, p. 159) It does set limits on the injustices that (in theory) be committed on a captive of war by the warriors of Israel.

The author of Deuteronomy would not understand the questions that people from a postmodern secular word (or even earlier worldviews) would have with passages like this, it was simply the world they lived in. Even though there are parts of the bible that can be read as sympathetic with a feminist or egalitarian view of sexuality there are large portions, like this one, which simply come from a world that would be alien to us. In the world that Deuteronomy speaks to: polygamy is an accepted and encouraged practice (to quickly grow the nation of Israel), being a brought into the chosen people of God (through conquest) is a privilege that the vanquished should be thankful for (many Christians shared a similar perspective in the conquest of the Americas), and ultimately in a male centered society the feeling of the women doesn’t carry very much weight. In the United States we can joke that, “if mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy” but assuming that type of worldview on the world of Deuteronomy is simply not true.

One of the gifts and challenges of wrestling through Deuteronomy is that it requires us to wonder how do utilize the wisdom and sometimes the wrongness (from a current perspective) of ancient scripture in our time. There isn’t a major calling for a wholesale adoption of the Deuteronomic and Levitical practices as a guide for life in our time, but I think the pieces of Deuteronomy that make me uncomfortable force me to think about questions like, “how then should women be protected in situations involving combat?” “How do we honor the scriptures and those who wrote them even when we disagree?” “Is there wisdom to be learned even in our disagreements?” “Are there places where the ancient scriptures challenged the world of their day?”

In the world of Deuteronomy, where women are looked upon as spoils that were treated however the captors chose: used while desired and then perhaps sold when no longer desired, Deuteronomy does place a restraint upon the power of the male head of the household. While the woman who is captured has no choice, once she is taken up into the household she does have some, albeit small protection. She is given a time to mourn, she is to lose hair and nails and fancy clothes that may have contributed to her being an object of attraction. She is given protection from being sold into slavery, even though being released does subject her to a significant economic challenge without a means of support. The reality is that she may be forced into begging or prostitution by the release but at least the releaser does not become the one to profit financially by this. Ultimately this is probably told in the hope that the one who releases would provide for the captive woman initially like the people of Israel receiving material wealth from the Egyptians prior to their leaving in the Exodus narrative. In its own harsh way I believe that Deuteronomy is trying to communicate a level of personhood and protection for the captured women. This provides a limit to the power over the booty outlined in Deuteronomy 20, not a sufficient limit for our time, but a limit nonetheless.

The reality of the plight of captive women in the ancient world, even within Deuteronomy’s system, forces them into marriages where they have no voice in the matter. The reality that in this world the woman has no choice over how her body is to be used may not be as far away as we would like to admit. Many women, and some men, in relationships may not feel freedom in how their body is used. Throughout history rape has been used as a part of the conquest of an area. Even today in combat zones throughout the world women’s bodies are not safe. As people of faith we need to be willing to answer the difficult questions of how we honor women and men and their bodies in relationship, in society and even in conflict.

Deuteronomy 21: 15-17 The Rights of the Firstborn

¹⁵ If a man has two wives, one of them loved and the other disliked, and if both the loved and the disliked have borne him sons, the firstborn being the son of the one who is disliked, ¹⁶ then on the day when he wills his possessions to his sons, he is not permitted to treat the son of the loved as the firstborn in preference to the son of the disliked, who is the firstborn. ¹⁷ He must acknowledge as firstborn the son of the one who is disliked, giving him a double portion of all that he has; since he is the first issue of his virility, the right of the firstborn is his.

This is one of those interesting passages where the Biblical narrative, particularly as it relates to God’s freedom, comes into conflict with the ordered worldview of Deuteronomy. This passage places a limit on the freedom of the male head of household with respect to passing on the inheritance. A husband is not allowed to pick a younger son from a (currently) favored wife to inherit in preference to the eldest son. Matters of inheritance were serious business in the ancient world as possessions and land passed from one generation of men to the next. Yet, it is interesting the way that the narrative of the people of Israel comes into conflict with this fairly simple and common understanding of inheritance.

Throughout the book of Genesis there are stories of later sons inheriting the first born portion. Beginning with the story of Abraham and Sarah and Hagar, the first born son, Ishmael, is set aside for the child of promise, Isaac. In this story the argument could be made that Hagar was never the wife of Abraham so the promise wouldn’t flow to Ishmael but to Isaac. Yet in the very next generation there is the stories of Jacob and Esau where Jacob, by trickery, gets both the inheritance and the blessing. Joseph is favored by his father over his brothers because he is the first child of Rachel, the favored wife, and later Reuben, the firstborn, is passed over for Judah because of sleeping with his father’s concubine Bilhah. David is chosen by God to be king even though he is the youngest brother and in the political intrigue surrounding David’s impending death he appoints Solomon to reign instead of older brothers. There are many other examples that could be lifted up, but things are rarely as neat and orderly as Deuteronomy may want them to be.

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 The Rebellious Son and the Community

¹⁸ If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, ¹⁹ then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. ²⁰ They shall say to the elders of his town, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” ²¹ Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. So you shall purge the evil from your midst; and all Israel will hear, and be afraid.

This portion of Deuteronomy links back to the commandment:

Honor your father and mother, as the LORD your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the LORD your God is giving you. Deuteronomy 5: 16

And attempts to legislate how families are to deal with children, particularly male children, who bring dishonor upon the household. Deuteronomy has a harsh view of justice and of honor and being a dishonor to one’s parents is lifted up as a capital offence. However, when you read closely to this passage there is a significant limit placed upon the familial authority. Families are not allowed to take matters into their own hands. The family is expected to be firm in their disciplining of their child but the threat, “I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it!” was not to be left to the discretion of the parents. The disciplining of the stubborn and rebellious son is left to the community, but must be initiated by the parents. Again the elders are expected to take upon themselves the role of judging for their community.

We wouldn’t sanction execution of children, even adult children, in our society for being stubborn and rebellious, being a glutton or a drunkard or refusing to obey parents. We as a society do set limits on what is acceptable for parents with respect to disciplining. Navigating the boundaries between discipline and abuse can be tricky at times but that is one of the decisions we make as a society for the protection of children. How we care for our elderly also is a part of this discussion as we create rules for a society and how their children are allowed to treat them, since the commandment on honoring parents probably primarily refers to how adult children care for their elderly parent as I discuss when talking about Deuteronomy 5. We may not always agree with Deuteronomy’s harsh stance on justice, and working through this part of the book can seem very legalistic, but the author of Deuteronomy is trying to construct a society that is living out of God’s covenant. In our society we also have to figure out how to advocate for rules that protect children and families, providing limits and unfortunately penalties for people who do not live in accordance with those laws.

Deuteronomy 21: 22-23 A Limit on Execution for the Sake of the Land

²² When someone is convicted of a crime punishable by death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, ²³ his corpse must not remain all night upon the tree; you shall bury him that same day, for anyone hung on a tree is under God’s curse. You must not defile the land that the LORD your God is giving you for possession.

For Christians this is one of those rare portions of Deuteronomy that is well known because of its echo by Paul in his letter to the Galatians:

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”—in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Galatians 3: 13-14

As Paul wrestles with the scandal of the cross among both Jewish and Greek audiences he alludes back to this piece of Deuteronomy and recasts it as a part of the language to explain the death of Christ. The passage does not have a problem with the execution, even hanging or crucifixion, but it does place a limit upon the way that body can be used.

Gladiators Crucified after the Third Servile War (73-71 BCE)

In the ancient world executions had both a physical and a psychological dimension. Physically it killed the person who was executed but it also worked psychologically by making the person a public display of the cost of disobedience. Victims of crucifixion in many cultures were left out to both rot and be dismembered by animals as the executor destroyed not only the person but their honor. In cultures ruled by fear the executed one became a grotesque billboard proclaiming what happened to those who challenged the regimes in power. For the Hebrew people they were to treat the dead differently. As mentioned above in verses 1-9, and in Deuteronomy 19 there is the concept of blood guilt but here it is expanded to a curse upon the land for leaving a cursed person out in the elements. In the world of Deuteronomy the land and people are defiled by failing to deal properly with the dead.

This passage also may help shed some light on the crucifixion narrative in the synoptic gospels where Joseph of Arimathea requests the body of Jesus and buries it on the night of the crucifixion as well as John’s narrative in John 19: 31-37 where the Jewish leaders don’t want the bodies left on the cross. But for the Jewish people they were not to be a culture who relished in death, they were not to display dead bodies or skulls so that others would fear them: instead this would be a source of defilement for them. The prophet Ezekiel can lift up in the vision of the destruction of the armies of Gog, how the burial of the bodies of the vanquished horde will be a part of the cleansing of the land (Ezekiel 39: 11-20)

Psalm 1 Poetry and the Law

18 Replies

The Reading of Torah in Synagogue

Psalm 1

Happy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked,

or take the path that sinners tread, or sit in the seat of scoffers;

² but their delight is in the law of the LORD,

and on his law they meditate day and night.

³ They are like trees planted by streams of water,

which yield their fruit in its season, and their leaves do not wither.

In all that they do, they prosper.

⁴ The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away.

⁵ Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,

nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;

⁶ for the LORD watches over the way of the righteous,

but the way of the wicked will perish.

Psalm one introduces what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “the Prayerbook of the Bible” and Martin Luther once called the “little Bible”. Here in these one hundred and fifty little (and occasionally long) poems and songs we encounter the breadth of emotion and dedication put into poetic form. Many scholars believe that Psalm 1 was added as a forward to the entire collection of Psalms and gives a summary of what is to lie ahead and the structure of the Psalm itself encourages this thought. The Psalm begins with the first letter of the Hebrew Alphabet with the word translated ‘Happy’ (‘aŝrê) and ends with the last word beginning with the last letter forming an inclusio, a device frequently seen in wisdom literature and denotes a completion of a thought or idea.

So why write poetry about the law? Seems strange or foreign to us and why introduce the Psalms with a meditation on the law? For many people poetry and rules are antithetical, but to a Hebrew way of life the law is at the center for their view of a life in harmony with God’s will. The simple dichotomy between the righteous and the unrighteous, the wicked and the law delighters may seem odd. This was a Psalm I never really enjoyed until recently because it seemed to pretentious, to easy to place oneself in the position of the righteous and not in the place of the wicked, but as an introduction to the Psalter and as a way of looking at the law not as something to be dreaded but something to delight in has changed my mind. It is not a coincidence that the Psalter begins with a meditation of the delight of the law and that the longest Psalm (Psalm 119) is a meditation on the law. That in knowing how one is to live, what it means to be in harmony with God’s will for the people and the world is joy. For the Hebrew people the law of the LORD is life and to ignore the way of the LORD is to undercut one’s own life. In a world of easy expedients that may bring short term prosperity the people are called to a way of life that is in harmony with the creator’s desire for the world.

The word translated happy, probably is better translated ‘blessed’ (this Hebrew word would be translated into Greek Septuagint (the Greek Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) as markarios which is the first word of each of the beatitudes in Matthew 5) and in entering into the poetry and the struggle of the Psalmists (since there are multiple composers of the Psalms) it is also an entry into the meditation on how one is to live in the continual meditation on the law of the LORD. Poetry and wisdom, life and the law, the way of the righteous and the blessed may not be simple and it may be something that continues to be a dialogue between the LORD and the LORD’s people, but entering into the meditation of the law of the LORD may not be an invitation to prosperity but it is an invitation into a blessed life.

The Place of Authority: A Brief History Part 4: Re-establishment, Disillusionment and Germination

1 Reply

Wojceich Stattler, Machabeusze (Maccabbes) Public Domain Art

I think I need to be clear at this point that while I am doing a historical trek through Israel’s story, I am not trying to do a history of Israel at this point, or even of the Hebrew Scriptures. I am intentionally trying to locate where authority rested within their story. Within key transitions the places of authority do change and how the people react to that authority changes and see how that might inform our current questions of authority. Hence, while it might be interesting to focus in greater detail on particular events, or to spend more time interpreting what is going on within a particular piece of scripture or what the theology of a particular author might be, that will have to be for another time and place as we continue on through the story.

A humorous illustration before we proceed. The Hebrew people remain deeply suspicious of external authorities which exercise authority over them, and so there will remain an antagonism between them and those who come to occupy their land. In another Monty Python reference we have the scene of the French Castle where the French refuse to recognize Arthur’s authority. For this period the Hebrew people will stubbornly resist assimilation by the empires that they are a part of.

Beginning around 538 BCE, during the reign of Cyrus of Persia, there is the beginnings of the return to Jerusalem and Judea. There are at least four major stages of the return which span a period of roughly 80 years, longer than the original period of exile, and even with the final return many of the people choose to remain settled and scattered throughout the empires of the day. The diaspora (the dispersion) those Jewish people scattered throughout the empire continue to at various levels maintain their practices and stories that make them distinguishable from the nations around them, but I will be focusing in on the remnant that returns to the promised land since that is where the final pieces of the remembered story of the Hebrew Scriptures (or Old Testament) come from.

Over the eighty years of re-establishment, many of the people return and their first concern is the reclamation of their land (or perhaps in some cases the claiming of land for their family).Remember that in an agrarian society land is the primary source of wealth and power. It takes a great deal of effort by the leaders and prophets to get the people to focus on the effort to rebuild the temple, and even once it is rebuilt it cannot compete with the memory of the former temple. In the memory of the people it is a shadow of the greatness of their past. Even with the codification of the Torah (law-quite possibly Deuteronomy) by Ezra and the completion of the city wall under Nehemiah, Jerusalem and what remains of the former nation are completely dependent on the will of the nations around them. The temple worship does regain some of its former status as one authority figure, but in the absence of a true monarch-temple authority that has the power to authorize the story of the people, the written and oral set of practices begin to take on a greater and greater role of what it means to be the chosen people.

Internal fault lines begin to emerge, not that they didn’t exist previously, but issues of purity and justice come into conflict with one another. At least, in the remembered story it seems that in the time of re-establishment purity becomes the dominant issue, the removal of foreign influences—even when it means disbanding families—and being a ‘purer’ Hebrew people who worship the one Lord in holiness. This is the mark of a society intent on establishing and maintaining boundaries between the insider and the outsider—and I don’t mean this to sound as critical as it may sound—when one feels the world is out to destroy you it is natural for an us/them (or Jew/Gentile) dichotomy to emerge. Yet even though this seems to be the dominant voice a counter-voice emerges, the prophetic voice that never went away and attempts to refocus the central focus on justice. Although there is a strong presence of the prophetic voice in the collected scriptures, it also never seems to gain the influence to reframe the story to create the type of society the prophets imagine.

Certainly within the prophetic voice, but also within the population there is disillusionment with the way things are. Things are not the way people hoped they would be, the temple is a shell of its former self, different religious groups vie for power and influence among the people, various incarnations of leaders try to rally the people with varying levels of success-but the reality is that for most of this 500 year stretch they are a people under the rule first of the Persians, then briefly under Greece. When the Greek empire splits up into the Ptolemaic Empire (in the South) and the Seleucid Empire (in the North) Jerusalem will find itself firmly at the middle of the struggle for power.

A final defining moment comes in 167 BCE with the Maccabean revolt, an event commemorated by Hanukkah today and remembered in the books named Maccabees, where the pressure of the outside influence to conform to a Hellenistic (Greek) culture causes a religious revolt which for a brief moment grants Jerusalem its independence. It is short lived, but it gives the people a memory of their practices defining themselves as a people who are willing to die for what they believe in. Again this is not universal, there are certainly those willing to accommodate, but there are also those willing to revolt, and that fire will not go out again for some time.

Deep divisions continue to grow within Judaism. They will not be fully in control of their own destinies after the fall of the Maccabees , but the hope for a new king, a new David, a messiah will persist. Religious authority will split between Saducees, who predominantly control the temple and accommodate with the kings like Herod, or whichever government official Rome places to govern Judea. With Herod the Great (who rules from 40 BCE-6 CE) reconstructing the temple in magnificent fashion (at a magnificent cost) the Sadducees are able to operate from a position of privilege. The Pharisees in contrast are more of a people’s movement focused on maintaining their identity through purity and right practice of the Torah. There are other groups, the Essenes who pull away and isolate themselves to remain pure, the zealots intent on driving the foreign influence from the promised land. Herod and Rome have the military authority, the Saducees in partnership with the Roman authorities run the temple and all is in a state of tension at the turning of the ages. We are approaching a great turning point in the story, from one group will emerge two-one that is new and one that will be completely reshaped. It is to the turning of the ages that we turn next.

The Place of Authority: A Brief History Part 3b: The Exile, Reconstructing Identity-Narrative, Practice and Hope

Sign of the Rose

Searchings: Sacred and Secular